• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Alabama prefers Pedophiles

 
 
 
Yeah, she sounds totally independent. /s
 
I guess it is heartening to know that Democrats are not the only ones clueless about what "pedophile" means ...
 
Fewer people know how to spell, or even pronounce,  hebephilia.

But remember, The Virgin Mary was a teenager, so it's okay.
 
Derec said:
I guess it is heartening to know that Democrats are not the only ones clueless about what "pedophile" means ...
Click to expand...

Yes, we all, know that Ray Moore is a hebephile, not a pedophile, as far as we know. This is the same pedantry that claims "homophobia" doesn't exist because no one is really scared by homosexuals.

Unfortunately for Ray Moore, the law does not make a distinction. For the purposes of the law, all minors are alike, when an adult gives them sexual attention. No one gets a pass because, "she was really mature for her age."

If Moore's actions had been exposed at the time, he could have been charged with sexual assault on a minor. In this day and age, that means at minimum, registering as a sex offender, and a place on the sexual predator web site.

The evidence against Moore must be pretty tight. As of this posting, Several Senators, including Mitch McConnell and Billy Cassidy have made public statements saying he should drop out. There is probably more information to come. One thing it keep in mind, Moore is a career attorney. That is a very small community in any city or state. In Alabama, it's smaller than most other states. There are no secrets. Everyone knows everyone else's business. If Moore were innocent of these charges, there would be a corps of people who worked with him in the 70's and 80's, who knew him, ready to say the whole thing is bullshit.

Right now, we have a lot of people who aren't saying anything, but that won't last much longer.
 
Bronzeage said:
The evidence against Moore must be pretty tight. As of this posting, Several Senators, including Mitch McConnell and Billy Cassidy have made public statements saying he should drop out. There is probably more information to come. One thing it keep in mind, Moore is a career attorney. That is a very small community in any city or state. In Alabama, it's smaller than most other states. There are no secrets. Everyone knows everyone else's business. If Moore were innocent of these charges, there would be a corps of people who worked with him in the 70's and 80's, who knew him, ready to say the whole thing is bullshit.

Right now, we have a lot of people who aren't saying anything, but that won't last much longer.
Click to expand...

Why do you conclude the evidence must be light? It's almost certainly past the statute of limitations, nobody is going to try to prosecute.
 
See? It's not just Catholics. Haven't I been trying to tell you? They're even using the same lame excuses.

- - - Updated - - -

Derec said:
I guess it is heartening to know that Democrats are not the only ones clueless about what "pedophile" means ...
Click to expand...

So it's ok for you to defend pedophilia because you don't believe Democrats know the definition of the word? That's a rather flaccid excuse even by your standards.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
Bronzeage said:
The evidence against Moore must be pretty tight. As of this posting, Several Senators, including Mitch McConnell and Billy Cassidy have made public statements saying he should drop out. There is probably more information to come. One thing it keep in mind, Moore is a career attorney. That is a very small community in any city or state. In Alabama, it's smaller than most other states. There are no secrets. Everyone knows everyone else's business. If Moore were innocent of these charges, there would be a corps of people who worked with him in the 70's and 80's, who knew him, ready to say the whole thing is bullshit.

Right now, we have a lot of people who aren't saying anything, but that won't last much longer.
Click to expand...

Why do you conclude the evidence must be light? It's almost certainly past the statute of limitations, nobody is going to try to prosecute.
Click to expand...

The burden of evidence to believe someone unfit for public office is not the same as a for a criminal trial. Despite Moore's denials, he has convicted himself with his own words.

He says he never dated teenage women, but only with their mother's permission. What the fuck does that mean? It means he dated girls who were still living at home and who needed parental consent before leaving the house in the company of a man.

His behavior was such that a Mall felt he was bad for business and sought to ban him. There is nothing in the current accusations which is out of character with Moore's public record, or public statements.

The issue here is not whether Moore is criminally liable for his past behavior. The issue is whether he preyed on young women, and more than that, is unable to admit to this, and lies to conceal it.

For a man who put such great store by the 10 Commandments, to the point he ended his judicial career for them, he can't seem to grasp the subtlety of Commandment Nine.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
Bronzeage said:
The evidence against Moore must be pretty tight. As of this posting, Several Senators, including Mitch McConnell and Billy Cassidy have made public statements saying he should drop out. There is probably more information to come. One thing it keep in mind, Moore is a career attorney. That is a very small community in any city or state. In Alabama, it's smaller than most other states. There are no secrets. Everyone knows everyone else's business. If Moore were innocent of these charges, there would be a corps of people who worked with him in the 70's and 80's, who knew him, ready to say the whole thing is bullshit.

Right now, we have a lot of people who aren't saying anything, but that won't last much longer.
Click to expand...

Why do you conclude the evidence must be light? It's almost certainly past the statute of limitations, nobody is going to try to prosecute.
Click to expand...

First of all, he has confessed to most of it, and waffles on the rest without giving a straight answer, so we have more evidence against him than we had against many of those Catholic priests. Most people had no problem assuming that the priests were in the wrong.

Were you this skeptical about the Catholic priests? Does your skepticism generally favor pedophiles, or only WASP pedophiles?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom